Under COPPA, how do I know if my channel is “directed to children”? Since the FTC and New York Attorney General announced their September 2019 settlement with YouTube for violations of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act Rule, we’ve heard that question from channel owners – sometimes called content creators. If you’re a channel owner who shares content on user-generated platforms like YouTube, read on for FTC staff guidance about the applicability of the COPPA Rule and how those covered by the Rule can comply with its requirements.

The FTC action against YouTube and Google

The lawsuit against YouTube and Google alleged that the companies illegally collected personal information from children, in violation of COPPA. According to the complaint, the companies collected that information from viewers of child-directed YouTube channels in the form of persistent identifiers that track users across the Internet, but didn’t notify parents and get their consent. To settle the case, YouTube and Google agreed to create a mechanism so that channel owners can designate when the videos they upload to YouTube are – to use the words of COPPA – “directed to children.” The purpose of this requirement is to make sure that both YouTube and channel owners are complying with the law.

A COPPA recap

That provision of the settlement has raised questions among content creators about how to determine if what they upload to YouTube or other platforms is “directed to children.” The answer requires a brief summary of some key COPPA provisions. Passed by Congress in 1998, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act is a federal law that protects the privacy of children under 13. COPPA’s foundational principle is one that most people can agree on: Parents – not kids, companies, platforms, or content creators – should be in control when it comes to information collected from children online.

The COPPA Rule defines “personal information” to include obvious things like a child’s first and last name or home address, but that’s not all. Under COPPA, personal information also covers what are called persistent identifiers – behind-the-scenes code that recognizes a user over time and across different sites or online services. That could be an IP address or a cookie when it’s used to serve targeted ads. Keep in mind that an operator also might be collecting personal information through an open comment field on its site or service that allows a user under 13 to make personal information publicly available. For example, think of a comment like this on a child-directed site: My name is Mary Jones from Springfield. I love this video!

How COPPA applies to channel owners

So how does COPPA apply to channel owners who upload their content to YouTube or another third-party platform? COPPA applies in the same way it would if the channel owner had its own website or app. If a channel owner uploads content to a platform like YouTube, the channel might meet the definition of a “website or online service” covered by COPPA, depending on the nature of the content and the information collected. If the content is directed to children and if the channel owner, or someone on its behalf (for example, an ad network), collects personal information from viewers of that content (for example, through a persistent identifier that tracks a user to serve interest-based ads), the channel is covered by COPPA. Once COPPA applies, the operator must provide notice, obtain verifiable parental consent, and meet COPPA’s other requirements. For information on how to comply with COPPA, please visit the FTC’s COPPA page for our Six-Step Compliance Plan for Your Business.

How channel owners can determine if their content is directed to children

Under COPPA, there is no one-size-fits-all answer about what makes a site directed to children, but we can offer some guidance. To be clear, your content isn’t considered “directed to children” just because some children may see it. However, if your intended audience is kids under 13, you’re covered by COPPA and have to honor the Rule’s requirements.

The Rule sets out additional factors the FTC will consider in determining whether your content is child-directed:

the subject matter,

visual content,

the use of animated characters or child-oriented activities and incentives,

the kind of music or other audio content,

the age of models,

the presence of child celebrities or celebrities who appeal to children,

language or other characteristics of the site,

whether advertising that promotes or appears on the site is directed to children, and

competent and reliable empirical evidence about the age of the audience.

The determination of whether content is child-directed will be clearer in some contexts than in others, but we can share some general rules of thumb. First, unless you’re affirmatively targeting kids, there are many subject matter categories where you don’t have to worry about COPPA. For example, if your videos are about traditionally adult activities like employment, finances, politics, home ownership, home improvement, or travel, you’re probably not covered unless your content is geared toward kids. The same would be true for videos aimed at high school or college students. On the other hand, if your content includes traditional children’s pastimes or activities, it may be child-directed. For example, the FTC recently determined that an online dress-up game was child-directed.

Second, just because your video has bright colors or animated characters doesn’t mean you’re automatically covered by COPPA. While many animated shows are directed to kids, the FTC recognizes there can be animated programming that appeals to everyone.

Third, the complaint in the YouTube case offers some examples of channels the FTC considered to be directed to children. For example, many content creators explicitly stated in the “About” section of their YouTube channel that their intended audience was children under 13. Other channels made similar statements in communications with YouTube. In addition, many of the channels featured popular animated children’s programs or showed kids playing with toys or participating in other child-oriented activities. Some of the channel owners also enabled settings that made their content appear when users searched for the names of popular toys or animated characters. Want to see the FTC’s analysis in context? Read pages 10-14 of the YouTube complaint.

Finally, if you’ve applied the factors listed in the COPPA Rule and still wonder if your content is “directed to children,” it might help to consider how others view your content and content similar to yours. Has your channel been reviewed on sites that evaluate content for kids? Is your channel – or channels like yours – mentioned in blogs for parents of young children or in media articles about child-directed content? Have you surveyed your users or is there other empirical evidence about the age of your audience?

What are the possible penalties for violating COPPA?

The Rule allows for civil penalties of up to $42,530 per violation, but the FTC considers a number of factors in determining the appropriate amount, including a company’s financial condition and the impact a penalty could have on its ability to stay in business. While Google and YouTube paid $170 million, in another COPPA case settled this year, the operator paid a total civil penalty of $35,000.

Isn’t the FTC taking another look at the COPPA Rule?

Yes, the FTC is currently evaluating the Rule in light of rapid changes in technology. If you would like to comment on the effectiveness of the COPPA Rule and whether changes are needed, the FTC has extended the comment deadline to December 9, 2019.

Why is it that everyone seems to be ignoring the giant pink elephant in the room? There is a VERY simple solution to this issue that the FTC could enact that would protect not only those defined as "kids" under the law, but would also protect the content creators and the platforms they use as well.

It falls to basic coding in the form of the "IF/THEN" and "AND/OR" lines of code. These platforms can require that to view content one must be signed in via an email address that has been verified. Most email groups, such as Google and Yahoo already require date of birth to be given when creating a new e-address. It is then a simple task for a competent coder who knows current internet protocol language to create a line or 2 of code to go something like: "IF" the email address of the viewer is less than 13 years "THEN" any cookies (or other forms of data collection) is blocked from reaching them. "AND" when said address reaches 13 years, "OR" a parental/guardian of the user of said e-address consents to them data collection it may then be allowed.

Seriously people. This has been the obvious solution from the start. Why has nobody implemented it thus far?

Thank you for allowing the public to voice their thoughts on this issue because right now this law looked like it was going to eradicate a lot of YouTubers which isn't fair. But there are still unanswered questions. For example, gaming as you said is not a one size fits all group. So will it come down to the game itself or the context in which the game is being played and spoken about? As a gamer myself, I'm very worried about this and I'm sure you are just as worried as I am.

I'm also glad you cleared up about animated shows not being just for kids as there are some animated shows like South Park, Family Guy, The Simpsons, etc. that are primarily for teens and adults. But what about shows that are somewhat in the middle? These shows appeal to kids yet they can have stuff in it that may not be for kids at all. Two examples of this are Teen Titans (not Teen Titans Go!) and Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu. These two shows do appeal to kids but may appeal to older audiences also. I hope you can clarify a bit more about this and hopefully come to a reasonable conclusion that doesn't destroy YouTube as a whole.

I am still worried about channels that review, theorize, or parody about children shows or movies, like Pokemon for example. They shouldn't be punished just for using topic popular with children. Context is very important here and that's something robots on Youtube wont be able to analyze.

I feel that the onus for advertising and management of access should not be on content creators on a shared platform. Especially one such as YouTube that has In the past inserted advertising into videos that were never intended to have any due to their mistaken belief the content had a claim by a third party.
With such automated systems already mucking up creators abilities to control advertising and access to their own videos it should be the host site's responsibility to restrict access to above 13, as the original law intended instead of punishing creators who create videos that may unintentionally draw draw In 12 year olds who share interests with 15 year olds.

Proof of age could and should be more strict if this is a serious issue.

The rules are to vauge. Anything you do could be classified as family friendly even if you are doing not family friendly things. This will absolutely ruin YouTube and spme of the stock market. Please ether make your own type of youtube and make clear and direct rules or fix coppa

It is my opinion that the burden of COPPA should fall on the shoulders of the advertisers. It should not be on the content creators nor Youtube. For a start, content creators have no input in what advertisers have access to their content. That is between advertisers and Youtube itself.

The second problem with the existing law and its outdated language. It passed before anyone had an inkling of what the internet could or would would become. The Federal Radio Commission, over time, became the FTC. Likewise, the laws governing radios and phones adapted over the course of a century. Now we must look to the current landscape and have COPPA adapt.

Furthermore, children very are curious by nature. If left unsupervised, they will access all manners of subjects on the internet. The duty of protecting children from questionable content is 100% the parent's responsibility. But its not FTC's place to control parents. So regulation should fall to the companies that advertise to children instead.

That said, should companies be trying to gather information on children? No. But should companies be trying to advertise to children in the first place? Of course not. A commercial advertisement serves to sell a good or service. The last time I looked, grade school children generally have zero income. Children cannot enter a legal contract or be responsible for their actions. So why advertise to them?

Companies should not be advertising - targeted or otherwise, to children under the age of 13. These children are not an economic demographic. A company should not attempt to engage in commerce with a 5th grader. As long companies can market their wares at children, there will be motive to do so. And they will on any platform that will have them.

In 1990, The Children’s Television Act passed. It meant to provide more educational programming while limiting advertising. Now, children's programming shouldn't 100% education, children deserve entertainment as well. But the law shouldn't have limited children's advertising. It should have eliminated it.

A Youtube video can have bright colors, fun characters and catchy songs. An advertisement for a product; toys, clothes, games, food, even vitamins, should not.

In closing, I ask you to consider who is behind the tracking and identifying child viewership. It's the advertisers.

youtube seems stupid to erase the option to comment my 9-year-old brother comments and does not comment I sell my address is such that he does not comment good video seems good to me the coppa law but that they remove community and commentary stories is a fool of them

Foreign-based websites and online services must comply with COPPA if they are directed to children in the United States, or if they knowingly collect personal information from children in the U.S. The law’s definition of “operator” includes foreign-based websites and online services that are involved in commerce in the United States or its territories.

The FTC clearly hasnt taken into account that a lot of teen-to-adult focused channels use many forms of modern media as part of their videos. I follow a channel directed towards players of a particular video game that only recently became widely known, yet they use imagery and music on occasion from "children's shows" such as Pokemon, Spongebob Squarepants, and others.

This COPPA act, while on paper, sounds like a method of protecting children, is badly designed, when you consider that 12 year olds can hear the name "PewDiePie" and know exactly who someone is talking about, even though that particular content creator is focused more towards adults. There is no well defined line between what properly counts as "child oriented" when it comes to some media such as video games like Minecraft, or television shows like Spongebob. For games like Minecraft, are more geared towards adults, due to its content being largely cartoonish animated violence (when applicable) and generally child-friendly; many older adults who still hold the mindset that videogames are "for children" will not be of sound enough or educated enough mind to acknowledge that while under 13s can play and enjoy a game such as that without being exposed to "harmful subjects", the game was not meant, for them.

And television shows like Spongebob, while childishly animated and very kid-friendly, have a large variety of adult oriented topics and subtle references and jokes - the same as many "children's" cartoons since the animated image became an American pastime - and get used by adult content creators to connect with their similarly adult, or older teen, audiences.

This COPPA act requires an extensive review by some of the larger, and a few of the lesser known, content creators on sites like Twitch.tv, YouTube.com and others, as there are glaring holes in its wording and alleged stipulations, that can be all to easily abused by someone who simply decides they do not like the idea of a 30 year old woman playing video games and earning money from it.

As this act was created as an attempt to "protect the children" something that must be noted is that the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (Hereby called the ESRB) was created to determine the suitability of video games for younger generations. All games released in America, have an ESRB rating from E (for Everyone) and M (For Mature). However, many modern parents do not pay attention to the ESRB rating, thus allowing the very children this act is allegedly designed to protect, to experience the same sorts of content that would be experienced on non-child-focused websites.

Not to mention, current video websites like YouTube, use what is called a "bot" to track and monitor users clicks to various videos, and change both recommendations for videos, as well as advertisements, based on these actions. This system, can very well lead a child to see an ad for a violent, otherwise M-Rated game, or lead them to a channel designed and intended for adults, filled with "foul language" and "harmful imagery", even though neither the content creator themselves, nor the child, intended for said child to witness it. Under this COPPA act, the FTC would then be holding the content creator responsible for this incident, even if they followed all the required directives to "flag" (or designate) their channel as "not intended for children".

Therefore, due to this glaring oversight in the creation of this act, that one potential incident holds a high chance of becoming a needless and fierce legal battle, because of how vague and improperly defined the boundaries of this act are.

Therefore, as both a consumer and a content creator myself, I call upon everyone involved, to review this COPPA act, and actually enlist the experience of multiple content creators, to better revise the parameters of what can count as "child oriented". Because the world is not so blatantly black and white, and many things that older people, including lawmakers, would consider "for children", are actually designed for adults, that happen to like very similar imagery. Which is, needless to say, a far larger group of people than these "lawmakers".

I'm still not sure if COPPA will cover my YouTube channel. I know that I make drawings and animations with characters but sometimes I draw them in different ways that feature more skin than clothes or hurt in a certain way.

These rules are clearly written by people who do not understand the internet and Youtube. They are short sighted and poorly defined. Please engage actual experts rather than guessing and hoping. No matter your intention, you are in essentially killing the career of a significant number of Youtube content creators.
Again, please, please, please engage actual experts rather than trying to guess and hope for the best.

Dear FTC, I watch a multitude of different channels that cover a broad audience. Just because a Chanel has something that appeals to kids doesn’t mean it’s just a kids things. I’m 15 and I like to watch therioes on Minecraft or Five Nights at Freddie’s and you should fine content creators that cover those subjects because they are a broad topic that anyone can like. Like doll repaint videos, squishes being repainted, slime videos, therioes on beloved games like I said before Minecraft. Or anime because anyone can like anime. It doesn’t matter wether or not you’re a kid or an adult those are both things that anyone can enjoy. So it’s unfair to everyone covering those topics because it is such a broad subject. Or people making family vlogs. You shouldn’t do that it’s just unfair to both the audience and the creators. So please, to all those at your work who don’t have a phone or if you do have a phone reconsidered what you are doing because YouTube is a broad platform that anyone can find what they like. Sure a bunch of kids are on it, but what wide range platform doesn’t? To give penalties to people who are doing what they love and are some/most times depend on YouTube for giving them their paycheck since it’s the only thing they have for a job or can make to support themselves. It’s likes saying, “Hey you aren’t doing you’re job as I want you because it cover a wide range of topics. I’m giving you an 80-90% deduction on you’re paycheck ever time you don’t do as I say.” Because that just isn’t fair. I know you are trying to do the right thing. But this isn’t the way for doing it because A) We don’t have a smart enough AI to sort out what is and isn’t for kids or is a broad subject that anyone can enjoy and B) Don’t have both the time or people to check over Every. Single. Video. That. A. Person. Makes.
So please for the love of everything holy and unholy. DONT FINE CREATORS FOR NOT BEINGING ABLE TO DECIDE WETHER OR NOT THEY ARE MAKING VIDEOS TARGETED FOR KIDS BECAUSE THEY MAKE SUCH BROAD CONTENT!!! Also isn’t it excessive to fine them $42,000!?! Seriously an average person isn’t able to make that kind of money in under a month!! It could literally put people into poverty. You are basically dictating whether or not a person has a job to support either them or their family. You are basically fining nearly (for what I understand) nearly 70-90% of YouTube creators. I could be wrong but a majority of YouTubers do appeal to a wide audience. So for the love of everything holy and unholy, please. Give people more time and rethink what can both benefit/help you, YouTube, Content Creators/YouTuber, and the audience that is on YouTube. Thank you and for the love of God/Gods watch GameTherioes video on this to grasp the ACTUALLY SCALE OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING!!!!!!!

I think the new rule is unfair. The children going on youtube have there parents permission or maybe the parents should just pay more attention to there kids. The new rule will ruin many channels,lives, and the whole website. games like minecraft that might appeal to children will be taken down which is unfair. Story time animators will be gone to because they might mention a toy. Just because your guidelines are so tight it does not mean we should suffer and have are favorite channels taken away. Now the only stuff we could watch are math problems being solved because of these silly rules. Now stuff cant be two edgy and no way in heck can it be family friendly. These rules ruin youtube for everyone who is over thirteen and likes gaming or animation channels. I think this rule should be changed.

FTC: "Hello FTC, I'm a big youtuber's fan and some rulles about new Youtube politics can be prejudice some creators about pop culture... Like when they need to talk about
famous characters or cartoons... Not every content is destined for kids... Could you change this us?"

My son is 16 and autistic. He is in bits over this change. Utube is his gateway to socialisation ......his only way of comfortably communicating. He is devastated that many of his favourite utubers are no longer going to make videos and feel that his life is over. Before you go making changes think of the way this will affect people like my son who rely heavily on the internet. He literally cannot concentrate on anything but the potential negative outcome this change will impose on utube and the millions of utubers who use it. This is not a simple rule change to him and there is nothing i can say or do to help him. This change is affecting his school work and his entire life and although this may sound silly and stupid to most, until you have walked in his shoes and understand how the mind of someone affected with autism this really is life changing for him and not in a positive way.

When the FTC does something like COPPA, they don't realize that it will pretty much DESTROY millions of lives. Please FTC, add an option for "Mixed Audience/All Ages Content/Parental Advisory for videos that use the things that qualify as "For Kids" but also do other things.

Special care needs to be taken that video game-related content is not unfairly targeted. Just because someone is streaming a game intended for children does NOT mean the channel is made for or intended for children. Many adult YouTubers enjoy playing games from their childhood, but use adult humor and language. This does not make the channel content made for children.

I would like to say that, could you please make the rules more understandable and not so vague? Like for example, you have been saying that gaming content is directed towards kids, but it is not kids who watch it. Gaming content should not be labeled as kids content. It should be mature content.

There is literally a YouTube Kids app. That's where kids need to be going to watch videos that are directed to children. If parents, guardians, or caretakers allow children on the main YouTube website, they need to be responsible enough to monitor what those children are watching.
By potentially punishing YouTube content creators you would also punishing their audiences. I am a grandparent, and 99% of the channels I subscribe to are probably considered directed to children based on your definition.

In order to interact with YouTube videos you need an account. I just tried to set up a new YouTube account using the year 2009 for my birth year, and I was immediately denied. YouTube isn't intended for kids under 13. Please quit punishing the entire YouTube community for irresponsible parents, guardians, or caretakers.

It's not fair to all of the creators that earn a living on youtube. Where are all the family friendly content is going to go? If it's YouTube Kids, just please make a upload button. There are millions and millions going to quit. It's the parents fault of their kids are watching YouTube. Also, if your video have badwords, and animated characters, is it still family friendly? I don't want to go and pay 42k for just a family friendly video. Thank you.

My problem with COPPA and YouTube is that not all videos that this law would count as made for kids may not be intended for children to watch. A video from a YouTuber who is at Disneyland, sees Disney characters, but goes around trying different alcoholic drinks could still be marked as made for kids because it had cartoon characters and colorful backgrounds in it. Please consider adding a general audience option as well. I understand COPPA is intended to protect kids but kids will watch whatever they can find on YouTube if parents are not being parents.

I have 3 questions:
1) Even if it isn't directed for kids, how in the world are, even you guys, able to track everything to check and see if it is a child-safe idea WITHOUT "spying" or tracking every single thing that everyone does anywhere in the world. For all I can see, you are saying that this is going into heavy consideration over YouTube and Google. Both are very broad and are really difficult to understand not just because of content, but because of each country, language, and content. Take this example:Say I am from Germany making content for kids, do I follow COPPA, which is American Made? Do I get fined?
2) Because of how content is made, how do we follow COPPA if I don't track their emails or anything else without breaking the security of the people?
Theoretically, you would need a software to track every single movement on these two majorly used programs, determining what their age is, who they are, and what sites they are tracking. This would also mean that if someone was an "adult" and was an actual kid, you would need a hardware device connected to the program, but that would mean that would be exposing your terms of privacy. Because YouTube said that there may be kids that might watching the more adult-topic sections, that would mean that YouTube is aware of the problem, but can't do a thing about it because there is no way of tracking them.
3) YouTubers all are trying their best to show what their ads are and what aren't by going off topic. Even my younger sister, says that she notices the ads and doesn't want any of it because the YouTuber said so. She wants it because she likes it, and the same can be said for many kids. In fact, the parents usually will be asked if the kids can buy something if it is said by the YouTubers because most of the kids think that their parents can buy them everything they want. And that isn't illegal on anyone's portion. I can understand if people are showing advertisements involving certain content that the kids might like because they aren't targeting them, so who is really the "advertisers" that you are speaking of?

I would like you to consider this next time before you put this act into effect and question yourselves about any other major topics that seem to be concerning to the rights of the people.

If you are a channel owner, when you upload a video to YouTube that is "directed to children," you will use the mechanism YouTube and Google created to label that video.

How can you determine if what you upload to YouTube or other platforms is “directed to children"? There is no one-size-fits-all answer about what makes a site directed to children. If your intended audience is kids under 13, you’re covered by COPPA.

This blog has more information to help you. And, the complaint in the YouTube case offers examples of channels the FTC considered to be directed to children. Read pages 10-14 of the YouTube complaint.

Something to understand, specifically referencing animation channels, is that sponsors are usually a very helpful way to discern whether a channel is geared towards kids. (Note: sponsers differ from adverts due to sponsers directly reaching out to the person(s) operating the channel and paying them to make a statement about a product they've been paid to endorse. Automatic ads provided by YouTube work differently. For more information on advertisements verses sponsers, contacting YouTube directly would be ideal.) For example, if a channel has a lot of color and is discussing something that would normally be considered "kid-oriented" has a VPN (network security) sponsers, it may be directed more towards a young adult audience. On the other, if a channel has a sponsor such as a mobile app on a video with a lot of child targeted content, it could be subject the new changes.

I am grateful FTC is reviewing the coppa law and hope its updated version will be easier for us the small business owners of our channels to implement.
Please consider the fact the law need to be updated so that getting parents cosent via email or site/platform signup is possible, such change will be easy for youtube to implement.

Many creators need the target ad revenue to have incentives to continue their program channels and 1 person operation should not be subjected to the same kind of punishment that is meant to dish out to a giant corperation.

I have some concerns regarding gaming on YouTube and especially for creators who make content on Nintendo games. Nintendo makes a lot of games aimed towards kids but are also enjoyed by teens and adults and many creators make content on Nintendo's games that weren't intended for children to watch but may seem that way. For instance, various videos I have made are on the game Super Smash Bros, and they contain swearing and profanity. These videos are clearly not for kids, but the game itself is. I'm not the type of person to swear often so some of my videos don't have any swearing in them, but I don't think these videos are really meant for kids still. When I speak, I'm not speaking in a tone meant for children I'm just being myself. I also refer to the characters as "dead" or "killed" when they're defeated which is clearly not child-friendly talk. I'm worried that Nintendo YouTubers such as myself are going to have problems when it comes to making content aimed towards an older audience who enjoy games more aimed towards kids.

Pages

Add new comment

Privacy Act Statement

It is your choice whether to submit a comment. If you do, you must create a user name, or we will not post your comment. The Federal Trade Commission Act authorizes this information collection for purposes of managing online comments. Comments and user names are part of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) public records system (PDF), and user names also are part of the FTC’s computer user records system (PDF). We may routinely use these records as described in the FTC’s Privacy Act system notices. For more information on how the FTC handles information that we collect, please read our privacy policy.